Forum Moderators: not2easy
The main elements are the logo and background design of the theme.
The agency feels that the logo is thier property and not wanting to give the originals to the client. (Fearing lost income I am sure).
I don't understand this point of view, if someone is contracted to write a program, that program and code is the property of the client. What is acceptable to ask for? If not the Photoshop.psd file then Can we ask for specific versions of the work?
Any experinces or suggestions welcome.
scott
That certain hourly rate is completely negotiable, depending on all the usual suspects, supply and demand always being the top two.
Tell your client to check out elance. You can usually get a pretty good deal their.
The agency feels that the logo is thier property and not wanting to give the originals to the client.
I'll assume that the client signed some sort of contract and/or agreement prior to having their brand developed by this agency.
If that is the case, then one of the first invoices the client should have received was for the development of the logo. If the client paid that invoice, the logo belongs to the client. Unless of course there is something else specific in writing that states the logo remains the property of the agency.
I work in an agency environment and we would never claim rights to a client logo as long as the concept and development work were paid for. If we developed a concept and the client opted not to use it, then the rights to the concept remain with us and we clearly state that in our initial proposal.
This kind of reminds me of the ole' image royalty thing. Years ago before royalty free images were popular, you'd have to pay based on the usage of the image (this is still practiced today). In essence, you are holding the client hostage in these types of scenarios and it leaves a bad taste in the mouth.
Do you want to lose a client forever? Hold them hostage like the above agency is doing. ;)
Lot of developers make money off charging little and then reselling what they have built for other people.
I'm not sure what the equivalent terminology might be in other countries, but "work for hire" is the key concept in US and Canadian law.
If the contract specified that the project was done as "work for hire" then the client who commissioned the work owns the rights to it, not the creator.
However, if the contract did not specify that the project was done as "work for hire" (or if there was no contract) the rights remain with the creator.
It is quite common for creative people such as musicians, writers, graphic designers etc. to charge more if they won't be retaining rights to their own work. Do a search for "work for hire" in conjunction with other terms such as copyrights, intellectual property, etc. and you'll turn up useful information.
If the contract specified that the project was done as "work for hire" then the client who commissioned the work owns the rights to it, not the creator.
Disclaimer: IANAL, but...
Under the old U.S. Copyright law, that was the case, but is no longer.
Under current law, regardless of the project being a "work for hire", the copyright belongs to the creator, unless a contract or other agreement specifically transfers the copyright to the client.
The answer as to whether you have the rights to the original content is in there. If it says you, it's you - if it doesn't say ANYTHING, it's theirs. If you don't have any agreement ... theirs.
As a general rule, when you're paying someone to create software or graphics for you, you are paying for the finished product - not the process of getting there. I'm a programmer, and when a client contacts me to have some work done the first thing I ask them is if they want the source code, or just the completed application. Their answer determines the price - obviously I charge a lot more to release the full source.
As for them using it later, that's part of the game - my general rule is that if the client pays for the full source, then it's given to them and I never use it again or base future work on it. But if they just want the finished app and someone else comes along later and wants the same thing, heck yeah I'm going to use code I've already done instead of starting over from scratch. If THAT person wants the full source, I explain to them that there is already a similar copy out there first, and come off of the price since most of the work is already done. If they're OK with that, it's done there. If not, I start from scratch and charge them full price for my time.
But anyway ... ownership of the source is not implied when you outsource a job, only if it's requested at the time of order. Unless you specifically request that you want the source, you are paying only for the finished product. Same goes for graphics and other stuff.
With the case of graphics, though, you do have a loop hole. You can always trademark your image (It's about $400 I believe in the United States) - and that would prevent them from using your logo for any other clients. Even though they were the original creators, YOU hold the trademark so at least they can't resell your logo :)
